Rove: Why would any GOP candidate give Trump a platform?

posted at 1:30 pm on December 6, 2011 by Ed Morrissey

Both Andy McCarthy and Matt Lewis shrug off concerns that Donald Trump’s sudden insistence on injecting himself directly into the campaign, suggesting that the debate series themselves have been bad enough that Trump’s participation is a lesser concern. Karl Rove, however, wonders how any Republican candidate would want to give oxygen to someone who (a) promises to provide an endorsement in the primary and/or (b) threatens to run against a Republican nominee he doesn’t like, let alone give him a platform to attack said candidates if he so chooses. Rove urges Reince Preibus to call an end to the circus forthwith:

Later with Greta van Susteren, both recalled the outrage that erupted when Gwen Ifill moderated a debate in 2008 after having written a book about Barack Obama:

Rove didn’t hide his feelings about the debate from the beginning of the segment, explaining that in Trump, “We’ve got a guy who is not only saying ‘I’m going to make a decision on who I’m going to endorse shortly after this debate and I’m already leaning someway, and I may run myself’ and we expect him to be the impartial moderator? Could you imagine what would happen if MSNBC hosted a debate and the moderator said ‘I’m going to endorse…’ Nobody would show up!”

Van Susteren argued that a similar situation arose when PBS’s Gwen Ifill moderated a general election debate in 2008 despite having written a book on then-Senator Barack Obama, a situation in which, Rove countered, “all heck broke loose.” There was also the matter that Trump had controversial positions and didn’t have any experience in journalism. “Is Mr. Trump going to ask the candidate whether they agree with him that Barack Obama was not born in the United States… that George W. Bush is ‘evil’?”

Rove went on to argue that Trump was “not a newsman” and that “he could do a lot of damage to somebody.” “I think it’s just odd,” he continued, then suggesting that “everybody’s going to bust up their holidays” to go to the debate and it would still have “the smallest viewership of any one of the debates this year.”

In my column for The Week, I point out that the Trump debate actually makes the complaints about the debate process worse rather than improve the situation:

Equally mystifying, at least two Republican candidates have agreed to participate in this debate. Rick Santorum can’t afford to miss an opportunity, but what is Newt Gingrich thinking? The new GOP frontrunner doesn’t need the exposure at this point. Moreover, Gingrich has spent the last few months ripping conventional debates’ formats. He offered an alternative last month with Herman Cain on entitlement reform, and will meet Jon Huntsman next Monday for another “Lincoln-Douglas”-style debate on foreign policy in New Hampshire. Now, in the name of being “open to new ways of doing things,” Gingrich will end up granting respectability to a forum hosted by a self-promoter who might just end up being one of his opponents in November 2012. It’s not likely that the cheesy game-show vibe of the current media debate format will be greatly improved by an actual game-show host.

Not every Republican candidate will play along with the farce. Jon Huntsman told Fox News’ Martha McCallum that he was “not going to kiss his (Trump’s) ring, and I’m not going to kiss any other part of his anatomy.” Ron Paul openly scoffed at Trump’s involvement, and the efforts by other Republicans to curry his favor, calling Trump’s forum “beneath the office of the presidency.” As if to prove that point, Trump responded by calling Paul and Huntsman “joke candidates,” which hardly becomes a moderator of a debate. Imagine the Republican outrage had Wolf Blitzer said something similar before a CNN debate, or anyone from MSNBC. Republican voters would have demanded their removal from any further debates — and rightly so.

In my post yesterday, some commenters argued that Trump would provide a breath of fresh air after the mainstream media moderators which have dominated the debates in this and every other cycle. Perhaps, but it also means that the Republicans who join him on stage implicitly endorse Trump as a legitimate political force, despite his demonstrated lack of depth and experience in the field and his meltdown last May. Given that Trump has threatened to run as an independent as late as yesterday, why would any Republican want to give Trump that kind of respectability? Would the candidates have allowed Mike Huckabee to moderate a debate in May when the former governor and now talk-show host still considered jumping into the race? Of course not, and they would have been correct to refuse.

Even apart from that, once the cameras start rolling, there is no control over what Trump might do or say. He has no problem attacking Republican candidates in the field who won’t participate in this forum; what happens when Trump starts attacking them on stage? What if Trump announces an independent run at the end of the debate, having declared himself dissatisfied with the responses he gets in the debate? Those participants will be left looking impotent and will have contributed to their own disaster. And far from breaking the grip of the MSM on the trajectory of the race, they will have fed into an event that the media would absolutely love.

In April and May, we had time for this kind of nonsense. We have four weeks to go before the Iowa caucuses, and it’s time to get serious — and that means gently telling Trump to get lost.

I agree w/ Rove(and Ron Paul -Gawd help me) on this.
Trump is in everything for Trump.
There no reason any GOP candidate should be kissing the Donald’s ring. His ‘debate’ is going to be a joke and the GOP’ers should be avoiding it like the plague.

Perhaps, but it also means that the Republicans who join him on stage implicitly endorse Trump as a legitimate political force, despite his demonstrated lack of depth and experience in the field and his meltdown last May.

He is a political force and they have already demonstrated that by their visits to Trump.

Given that Trump has threatened to run as an independent as late as yesterday, why would any Republican want to give Trump that kind of respectability?

Why are we giving the media that kind of respectability? Trump at least is seen publically as a political guy. They keep hand the debates to a media who are Democratic hacks, who are allowed a pretense of impartiality.

Even apart from that, once the cameras start rolling, there is no control over what Trump might do or say. He has no problem attacking Republican candidates in the field who won’t participate in this forum; what happens when Trump starts attacking them on stage?

They will get some spur of the moment training in how to deal with the leftist media. The next year will throw worse than anything Trump will say at them and it would be useful to know if they can deal with it.

Newt is going because he’s as much of an attention whore as Trump. Anybody who thinks this debate is a good idea or that Trump should be taken seriously shouldn’t be allowed anywhere near the Oval Office.

It would be dumb to attend this debate and those who do attend will deserve the criticism they will be on the receiving end of. Allowing the guy who embodies the image of Wall Street to manipulate you like a puppet is beyond silly.

Ed, I think the Trump debate is a terrible idea as well specifically because Trump might end the debate with “You all suck. You’re fired. Trump 2012!” But you are not helping the someone-stop-this-disaster cause by making Rove the spokesman.

Why would anyone who cost the republicans the control of the senate matter. Rove is full of himself. The Question should be who is paying Rove now.

Christine O’Donnel could have won. if it was not for Rove’s 40 minute rant that became the Demoncrats talking points. in the general election. Rove was being paid by the other republican candidate.

He also made statements on the Nevada race that aided and abetted Reid.

Trumph is not part of the Lamestream Media. Carl Rove is a contributing member and participant in the Lamestream Media, Who also makes a living being paid to pontificate on what he thinks should happen. We need to inform Rove that he does not matter, and should take a long hike off a short pier.

Why would any serious conservative support a party that has as its platform Karl Rove and the anti-conservative firing squad known as the GOP beltway punditry whose entire goal is to destroy any candidate but Oromney?

Obama has done conservativism a giant favor -he has shown us the duplicity of our Party -almost to a person. We need term limits on these folks, a dollar to them is a clone of a dollar to Obama and the Godless left.

Where is Reagan’s 11th commandment for these preachy folks?

Where is the scolding to put aside the moral issues for this election, as they in planned unison use moral issue to attack the man they fear now – not Obama, but Newt?

Where is the hated politics of persoanal destruction that they always tell us are only on the left?

You dignify the man by insinuating that he has principles. He’s is nothing but a paid political hack who will do whatever he’s hired to do. In this case, it’s the establsihment RINO party that sent him out to do their dirty work, like Obama sends out his union goons. He and his GOP bosses see conservatives as the enemy.

If Trump was a conservative, you might be able to make a case for this, but I haven’t seen any evidence that he’s greasy blowhard who wants attention. Maybe his conversion is sincere (but I doubt it) but his praise of candidate Obama, despite the lack of accomplishment, indicates that Donajussi only concerned with positioning himself with the team that’s winning. The MSM debate moderators are jokes but lowering the standard even more doesn’t make a lick of sense.

This one seemed really odd, so I followed the link. The headline is only somewhat related to what Newt really said, which was, if quoted correctly, that he “expected the Tea Party to evolve into” a militant wing. That is a much different statement.

trump will provide no breath of fresh air and anyone that thinks so is a an idiotic fool. this is about the donald, nothing else. he will try to trap and trick candidates and make them look stupid. let the liberals engage in these kinda parlor tricks. GOP candidates refuse to indulge this moron.

Whether you like Rove or not has nothing to do with the issue at hand:

Trump is a blow-hard opportunist, almost a clown-like figure. The fact that he’s a real estate mogul (classic leverage based shuckster) only makes him less credible. The more any candidate is associated with Trump and his games, the less presidential they’ll appear.

Why would any GOP candidate give the liberal media or the republican establishment a platform? Trump is a citizen. What makes him any less qualified to moderate a debate than Anderson Cooper or Andrea Miitchell?

There is also the fact that Trump released a book titled “Time to Get Tough” this week. It sure sounds like a Trump campaign manifesto. When Trump “fires” all of our candidates at the end of the debate after a sudden realization that they are not tough enough to take on China or seize Iraqi oil fields, and he announces that he may just be compelled to run for President after all, I don’t want to see anyone saying “Why didn’t we see this coming?”

Whether you like Rove or not has nothing to do with the issue at hand:

Trump is a blow-hard opportunist, almost a clown-like figure. The fact that he’s a real estate mogul (classic leverage based shuckster) only makes him less credible. The more any candidate is associated with Trump and his games, the less presidential they’ll appear.

peski on December 6, 2011 at 2:24 PM

He is also a citizen that has raised legitmate points. Why do we go to war for other nations and we pay all the cost including blod and treasure? Why dont we make them pay for their freedom?
I want to see him ask this to Mitt Romney.
Why do we borrow billions from China and give it to corporatioons that spend it foolishly? I want to see him ask it.
Whats the problem with this?

Trump was on Fox N Friends this morning, called Rove a “hack”, spat all over him, blamed him for Bush, the worst president ever, and so forth. Really, really nasty stuff versus Rove’s very reasonable concerns about Trump.

Why would any GOP candidate give the liberal media or the republican establishment a platform? Trump is a citizen. What makes him any less qualified to moderate a debate than Anderson Cooper or Andrea Miitchell?

He is also a citizen that has raised legitmate points. Why do we go to war for other nations and we pay all the cost including blod and treasure? Why dont we make them pay for their freedom?
I want to see him ask this to Mitt Romney.
Why do we borrow billions from China and give it to corporatioons that spend it foolishly? I want to see him ask it.
Whats the problem with this?

paulsur on December 6, 2011 at 2:28 PM

Those are all good questions I’d like to see asked and answered. Trump won’t do it, and if he does it will be in a manner that just puffs him up in some way.

I too really like the Huckabee format, even thought I’ve never been a fan of the man. The candidates should push for more events along those lines, and skip the Donald.

Speaking of which, why has the GOP decided today not to speak ill of Oboobi. Does that mean no more calling him by his full name? It’s OK for the establishment to trash talk GOP candidates, but Oboobi must not be disparaged?

BTW, seeing how Schmuckabee actually pulled off a really good ‘debate’ using 3 State AGs as a constitutional panel, Trump would be wise to emulate the format and call in Steve Wynn, Steve Forbes & Charles Peyton to be on his panel and have a pro-business/economy-centric debate.

Most of the so-called moderators in all of the debates have been in large part about themselves, which is the way people are.
We don’t need to be protected from Trump. We don’t give him credence by watching, anymore than we gave credence to any of the other moderators we watched. We can consider the source of the questions ourselves and we can see how the candidates respond to the particular moderator. I don’t see the supposed issue here.
Do we want candidates who are reluctant to meet with Putin because he is a self-serving bad guy out to do us harm? Or should we our media not report on our president meeting with Putin because Putin is a bad guy?
I look forward to seeing the candidates in as many different circumstances as possible, and I am negatively influenced by those candidates who appear to be very interested in controlling the environment in which they are asked questions.

Trump is on the right track. Attack the idiot obama from all angles. Have a little fire in the belly when fighting for America. After all the Ifils,Brokaws,Williams and the rest of the leftist stooges at least Trump is on the “right” side at this time. This can’t be any worse than the lsm.

In April and May, we had time for this kind of nonsense. We have four weeks to go before the Iowa caucuses, and it’s time to get serious — and that means gently telling Trump to get lost.

Sorry, Ed, I have to disagree with you on this.

The entire 3-minute soundbites gotcha GOP debates have been a farce. One more farce wouldn’t hurt.

I guess Rove et al. were okay with the format and whoever was moderating when Perry was still finding his feet and was the butt of jokes.

They elevated debates to an unprecedented level knowing very well it would be Perry’s weakness while Romney had been trained like a robot for that type of format. Now that Gingrich has surpassed Romney in the debate formats, they want to put an end to it?

I couldn’t care less about Trump moderating a GOP debate. He won’t be any worse than Scott Pelley or Brian Williams or any of the other idiots that have hosted these things so far. No, this debate needs to be boycotted because of the presence of Eason Jordan, period. Bringing this traitor on board smears anyone who takes part in it.

I haven’t shut the door on Huntsman, but he’s running out of road he needs to give people a reason not to dismiss him one reason I still take him serious? His choice in running mate Huntsman/Lawn Gnome 2012! I just hope the “Gnomes” are not stamped made in China on the bottom :)

I couldn’t care less about Trump moderating a GOP debate. He won’t be any worse than Scott Pelley or Brian Williams or any of the other idiots that have hosted these things so far. No, this debate needs to be boycotted because of the presence of Eason Jordan, period. Bringing this traitor on board smears anyone who takes part in it.

holygoat on December 6, 2011 at 2:53 PM

It’s not about the debate. Karl Rove wants Romney to be the nominee, he doesn’t want Trump messing with his formula for a Romney accession. What if people – voters, watch the Trump debate and someone catches fire? It’s a wild card. Karl Rove doesn’t like wild cards. The RNC and corporate media want to pick the republican nominee and next President. There are many good reasons why Paul and Huntsman should attend – media exposure before the caucus starts on January 3rd in Iowa for one.

I have no respect for Rove and his opinions. As far as the debate, the ones we’ve had that were sponsered by “journalists” were a disaster. Huckabee and the Lincoln/Douglas ones were good. This one may end up being well done as well. We’ll see, but I don’t see why everyone is so upset about it.

It’s not about the debate. Karl Rove wants Romney to be the nominee, he doesn’t want Trump messing with his formula for a Romney accession. What if people – voters, watch the Trump debate and someone catches fire? It’s a wild card. Karl Rove doesn’t like wild cards. The RNC and corporate media want to pick the republican nominee and next President. There are many good reasons why Paul and Huntsman should attend – media exposure before the caucus starts on January 3rd in Iowa for one.

Dr Evil on December 6, 2011 at 3:07 PM

I get what your saying, and I agree with all of it, except for the part about candidates attending it. I’d like to see these guys make a principled stand against any network who employs someone like Eason Jordan. That’s the reason to boycott this debate, not Trump. if Jordan were not involved, I would watch it. But he is, so I won’t, and I will forever hold those candidates who attend in lower regard than I would had they not attended.

I get what your saying, and I agree with all of it, except for the part about candidates attending it. I’d like to see these guys make a principled stand against any network who employs someone like Eason Jordan. That’s the reason to boycott this debate, not Trump. if Jordan were not involved, I would watch it. But he is, so I won’t, and I will forever hold those candidates who attend in lower regard than I would had they not attended.

holygoat on December 6, 2011 at 4:23 PM

The general public has no idea who this dude is. Also, most of us can not find ION on our channel lineup.

If candidates can do YouTube and Twitter debates, they can do a Trump debate. The point is opening up the process to other avenues and audiences. There is nothing sacred about CNN. Candidates do not “kiss Brian Williams’ ring” by attending an NBC-sponsored debate. Brian Williams and Wolf Blitzer are schmucks. If Trump wants to join the schmuck brigade, so be it.

Heck, the candidates all went on Huckabee last week. If Huck has more credibility than Trump I’m not seeing it.

Rove is no conservative. That Hannity calls him the architect is insipid. Levin asked him about that the other day and ribbed Hannity about it.

beatcanvas on December 6, 2011 at 1:36 PM

Heh!

For some reason, elections won by 50.1% made Rove. I’m just curious, where did our boy genius put his chips in 1975 and 1979? For some strange reason, I have a hunch it was on Ford and Bush, and not on Ronald “The Landslide Machine” Reagan.

That said, I’d rather Rove and Trump go flip off somewhere while us conservatives get to the serious work of defeating the Marxist scourge with whatever leadership we manage to carve out of the primaries. If, and when, we win the general, the fight to resurrect first principles as the bedrock of our nation will have just begun.

By the way, Rush had a lot to say about why Obama wants to run against Romney today on his show. He pointed out that the OWS was a setup to begin to demonize wall street and anyone associated with it. Rush cites an article where an off the record strategist for the Dems admits that they don’t want Newt because he doesn’t “carry the wall street baggage”.

I seriously believe that being a past philandering womanizer 15 years ago is not even in the same ball park as that bain capital photo of Romney with his peers stuffing money all over their suits and orifaces. Google Bain capital photo and Romney to see what I mean. That photo will cost Romney at least half of the so called “moderates”, the dummies who believe everything that comes across their tv set.

Those people who believe that Donald Trump — having personally tried and miserably failed to gain traction as a serious candidate earlier in the year — should somehow now be allowed to grab the position of final arbiter of Republican Presidential politics, presumably as some sort of self-awarded consolation prize, should have their heads examined.

Why does anyone even talk to Rove anymore? yeah, he was the ‘mastermind’ behind the Bush elections, but the only thing he has done and continues to do today is attack and bad-mouth the current GOP candidates. Whenever I see him on TV about to speak, I just turn the channel. I could care less what he says, the same with any other over-opinionated talking head or celebrity on TV.